To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

Canadian Gaming News, Issue 43 (1997, November)

Canadian Gaming News, Issue 43 (1997, November) - Page 1

Csnadian 6ie News
Issue 43 November, 1 997
Politicians and gaming regulators as
well as their offshoots - casino and
lottery executives - have for many
years taken comfort in the knowledge
that restrictive legislation, the grant
of licences, and government
ownership shield them from the
onslaught of competition.
While some bristle at the power and
privilege this gives to those in
control, it is a system which has given
the public a measure of protection
while allowing governments and
those fortunate to have licences, to
benefit enormously.
Within the Canadian context, the
federal Criminal Code continues to
buttress the status quo while a
political horsetrade agreed to over a
decade ago binds the federal and
provincial governments to one
another. While the federal govern-ment
has, at times, been tempted to let
go, both fear breaking the bonds lest a
horde of other issues come rushing in.
It is not our intent to say that this is
about to happen. To the contrary, the
provinces are more dependent on
their gaming revenue than ever before
and the feds, for now at least, have
other fish to fry. We do think,
however, that technological advances
in gaming ( internet, wide- ban
telephone lines) will soon transform
the way in which states and
provinces: conduct gaming within
their own jurisdictions ( a move away
Wired Gaming Deserves to
be followed closely!
from paper) and, should someone
some where break rank, that it could
bring the tidy system now in place
crashing down upon itself.
We all know about Caribbean- based
internet casinos. They'll never
impact upon us because the public
will be too worried about the
fairness of the games and anyway,
it's illegal for them to operate, or
accept bets in Canada and the
United States.
It's end of debate, you won, to the
extent that you believe that every-one
knows the law and follows it,
and that you believe governments
have the technology to catch those
who do not.
To play the devil's advocate, what
do we do if people start betting
significant money ( who would add
it up or decide what ' significant'
is?) on off- shore internet casinos or
international lotteries and it became
apparent to the guy on the street that
the government lacked the tech-nology,
as we understand is the case
today, to catch them?
We have talked with many internet
casino providers - few understand
why anyone would want to operate
out of North America - and they
have few concerns about law
enforcement. Their biggest concern
is to build credibility with the public
and, the flip side of this, to stay
away from scandal. Sound familiar?
What of the likelihood of someone
within the established gaming order
breaking rank?
Nevada recently agreed to allow
licensed operators within that state
to offer internet gaming to its
residents. As one sage put it to us,
why would Nevada, with more slots
and casinos in closer proximity to its
residents than any other jurisdiction
on earth, need internet gaming? No
Nevada operator is offering internet
gaming now or will likely do so until
the Nevada gaming commission
writes the regulations which it is not
expected to do until the state sees
what internet legislation Washington
passes this spring. We are told that
while Nevada is lobbying to have the
legislation written in a way that
permits Nevada operators to receive
bets from any jurisdiction which has
itself approved gaming ( we guess that
leaves Canada in and Utah out), this is
a long shot. Watch for them to target
Asian and other less regulated
jurisdictions which leaves our system
intact but will we then want to do this
too?
Canada's lotteries have wisely kept an
eye on internet gaming since 1995.
Late in that year the Inter- Provincial
Lottery Corporation created a sub-committee
to monitor the growth and
use of the internet as well as look at
legal and regulatory areas impacted by
internet gaming. While the sale of
lottery tickets, especially with recent
advances in encryption technology, is
increasingly viable, ' in home' lottery
sales has a stigma with which
governments may still be hesitant to
grapple. ' Rogue' state lotteries in
Australia and Germany ( in Australia
states have their own criminal codes
and lotteries) could pose a threat to
Canada's lotteries if they start using
the internet to sell their tickets in
Canada.
This past spring a Private Member's

The University of Lethbridge Library received permission from Ivan Sack to digitize and display this content.

Full-Text

Csnadian 6ie News
Issue 43 November, 1 997
Politicians and gaming regulators as
well as their offshoots - casino and
lottery executives - have for many
years taken comfort in the knowledge
that restrictive legislation, the grant
of licences, and government
ownership shield them from the
onslaught of competition.
While some bristle at the power and
privilege this gives to those in
control, it is a system which has given
the public a measure of protection
while allowing governments and
those fortunate to have licences, to
benefit enormously.
Within the Canadian context, the
federal Criminal Code continues to
buttress the status quo while a
political horsetrade agreed to over a
decade ago binds the federal and
provincial governments to one
another. While the federal govern-ment
has, at times, been tempted to let
go, both fear breaking the bonds lest a
horde of other issues come rushing in.
It is not our intent to say that this is
about to happen. To the contrary, the
provinces are more dependent on
their gaming revenue than ever before
and the feds, for now at least, have
other fish to fry. We do think,
however, that technological advances
in gaming ( internet, wide- ban
telephone lines) will soon transform
the way in which states and
provinces: conduct gaming within
their own jurisdictions ( a move away
Wired Gaming Deserves to
be followed closely!
from paper) and, should someone
some where break rank, that it could
bring the tidy system now in place
crashing down upon itself.
We all know about Caribbean- based
internet casinos. They'll never
impact upon us because the public
will be too worried about the
fairness of the games and anyway,
it's illegal for them to operate, or
accept bets in Canada and the
United States.
It's end of debate, you won, to the
extent that you believe that every-one
knows the law and follows it,
and that you believe governments
have the technology to catch those
who do not.
To play the devil's advocate, what
do we do if people start betting
significant money ( who would add
it up or decide what ' significant'
is?) on off- shore internet casinos or
international lotteries and it became
apparent to the guy on the street that
the government lacked the tech-nology,
as we understand is the case
today, to catch them?
We have talked with many internet
casino providers - few understand
why anyone would want to operate
out of North America - and they
have few concerns about law
enforcement. Their biggest concern
is to build credibility with the public
and, the flip side of this, to stay
away from scandal. Sound familiar?
What of the likelihood of someone
within the established gaming order
breaking rank?
Nevada recently agreed to allow
licensed operators within that state
to offer internet gaming to its
residents. As one sage put it to us,
why would Nevada, with more slots
and casinos in closer proximity to its
residents than any other jurisdiction
on earth, need internet gaming? No
Nevada operator is offering internet
gaming now or will likely do so until
the Nevada gaming commission
writes the regulations which it is not
expected to do until the state sees
what internet legislation Washington
passes this spring. We are told that
while Nevada is lobbying to have the
legislation written in a way that
permits Nevada operators to receive
bets from any jurisdiction which has
itself approved gaming ( we guess that
leaves Canada in and Utah out), this is
a long shot. Watch for them to target
Asian and other less regulated
jurisdictions which leaves our system
intact but will we then want to do this
too?
Canada's lotteries have wisely kept an
eye on internet gaming since 1995.
Late in that year the Inter- Provincial
Lottery Corporation created a sub-committee
to monitor the growth and
use of the internet as well as look at
legal and regulatory areas impacted by
internet gaming. While the sale of
lottery tickets, especially with recent
advances in encryption technology, is
increasingly viable, ' in home' lottery
sales has a stigma with which
governments may still be hesitant to
grapple. ' Rogue' state lotteries in
Australia and Germany ( in Australia
states have their own criminal codes
and lotteries) could pose a threat to
Canada's lotteries if they start using
the internet to sell their tickets in
Canada.
This past spring a Private Member's